On Mon, 01 Aug 2005 16:06:53 +0000, Rich Grise wrote:

snip

Anyway, there was a call-in show on CNN or CNBC or something, and they
were talking about the costs of the mission and stuff, and "Shouldn't
we be spending this money on Earth"

Note that not one dollar has been spent in space. The governmnet hasn't
figured out how to put toll booths up there, yet.

had come up, and so I dialed the
phone. I got through! I was gonna get to ask a question live on cable
TV! I very carefully phrased my question - all of the moisture had
drained out of my mouth and was coming out my armpits - I asked, "Is it
not true that if the US refrained from buying even _one_ aircraft
carrier or nuclear-missile submarine, that the savings would cover the
entire cost of NASA since its inception?" And the _real_ scientists
agreed to a man. The pols hemmed and hawed as usual.

Well, it's a nice story, but like all partisan pinko propaganda, it's not
true. NASA's buget is in the $15B/yr range, even these days. After 45
years of this sort of spending (you do the math) even a super-carrier is
dog food (not that I'm argueing against either).

Anyway, it was kewl at the time, and I just felt like sharing. %-}

Kewl truth. Propaganda is sometiems kewl. Truth is too boring for the
6:00 news. Any engineer worth salt should have been able to see through
this one.

--
Keith